Demonic, Warlike Animals Are the Rare Exception, Not the Rule: Wild Justice In Animals Redux

In a previous essay I argued that animals display emotional and moralintelligence and a good deal of fairness. Cruelty, violence, and warlike behavior are incredibly rare. A recent essay by John Horgan summarizes much of what is known about warfare in great apes and other primates and tells it like it is. Horgan is especially concerned with what is called the "demonic male" theory that states "both male humans and chimpanzees, our closest genetic relatives, are 'natural warriors' with an innate predisposition toward 'coalitionary killing,' which dates back to our common ancestor." Horgan summarizes what is known as follows:

All told, since Jane Goodall began observing chimpanzees in Tanzania's Gombe National Park in 1960, researchers have directly observed 31 intergroup killings, of which 17 were infants.... researchers at a typical site directly observe one killing every seven years ... my criticism — and that of other critics I've cited — stems from science, not ideology. The evidence for the demonic-males theory, far from extraordinary, is flimsy.

An article two weeks ago from the New York Times that speaks for itself, and challenges your theory. Here's the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/science/22chimp.html

And here's the lede:

Every day, John Mitani or a colleague is up at sunrise to check on the action among the chimpanzees at Ngogo, in Uganda’s Kibale National Park. Most days the male chimps behave a lot like frat boys, making a lot of noise or beating each other up. But once every 10 to 14 days, they do something more adult and cooperative: they wage war.

A band of males, up to 20 or so, will assemble in single file and move to the edge of their territory. They fall into unusual silence as they penetrate deep into the area controlled by the neighboring group. They tensely scan the treetops and startle at every noise. “It’s quite clear that they are looking for individuals of the other community,” Dr. Mitani says.

When the enemy is encountered, the patrol’s reaction depends on its assessment of the opposing force. If they seem to be outnumbered, members of the patrol will break file and bolt back to home territory. But if a single chimp has wandered into their path, they will attack. Enemy males will be held down, then bitten and battered to death. Females are usually let go, but their babies will be eaten.

Hey, you don’t have to tell ME that it’s stupid to justify undesirable human behavior by pointing out that animals (including animals closely related to humans) do the same thing. But I have to wonder… why have you waited until NOW to condemn that kind of thinking?

I have yet to see ANYONE saying, “Our primate relatives wage war, so obviously war is a good, healthy and natural activity.” If and when I encounter someone making such arguments, I’ll gladly tear their silly arguments apart. On the other hand, I FREQUENTLY see more liberal-minded zoologists point to same-sex play among primates as “proof” that homosexuality is both natural and good.

Have you been equally quick to condemn that kind of thinking? Why not? If it’s foolish to justify a human activity you disapprove of on the grounds that “other primates do it,” why isn’t it equally foolish to justify other behaviors that you like better on identical grounds?

I’ve got an idea- why not study primate behavior without an agenda? Let the Jane Goodalls observe their apes and tell us what they see. Primate behavior is fascinating in its OWN right. It needn’t hold any lessons for how modern humans should behave.

We humans aren't chimps and we aren't bonobos. Whether you're a War hawk or a peacenik, whether you're a Moral Majoritarian or a gay marriage enthusiast, why not make the best case you can for your positions without worrying what our simian cousins do?